Richmond Hill Yonge Line 1 North Subway Extension | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx

[Cobra]

That's not a statement of fact. That's Montreal asking for money (which they didn't get)

They did get the money and the deal was ratified in 2007

http://cmm.qc.ca/champs-interventio...if-dans-la-region-metropolitaine-de-montreal/

And yet here we are, ten years after they said that, and Montreal's Metro does travel into Laval and Longueuil (the latter station opened half a century ago) despite that system getting no funding from either of those cities. They don't charge people extra to travel to those cities either.

Actually they do pay their share. Laval had withheld their share and the Province ended up paying the $4M that were owed by Laval to end the dispute but the province issued a decree stating that anyone not paying their share as per the formula would not receive their share of the gas tax. Then Laval got a fare surcharge which by default hit Longueuil as well. The subway network used to be Zone 1 but stations outside of Montreal Island are Zone 3

As for the rest of your comment...you're entitled to your opinion

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

Can't be that much if tolling the DVP and Gardiner gets them that upset.
I work at Sheppard-Yonge and most people finds GO Transit way more useful and faster than TTC.

Your passion is admirable. it's too bad it's at the expense of logic.

You just said yourself that serving people outside Toronto, that's what GO is for, right? So, if I live just north of Steeles (which I do) and wanted to take transit to visit you at Yonge/Sheppard for a coffee, how pray tell would I do that using GO? I mean, here we are in TOTALLY different cities, and all.

I guess you think I should drive north to Langstaff, take the train down to Union and then the subway back up? Or YRT to Finch and then a GO bus?

Your blanket statement about "most people" you know doesn't tell us much about actual travel patterns and what's an efficient way to move people. Nor does the blanket statement that people who live at Bathurst/Steeles (for example)- but on the south side, can be moved efficiently by TTC but the people who live just on the north side are better served by GO.

Really, it's mostly funny how this thread spirals and repeats itself every 50 pages or so.

u
So, City of Toronto & fares are the main sources of revenue for the TTC.
Which all pay the O&M costs annually, which York Region isn't doing

Pffft. TTC is barely subsidized by Toronto taxpayers which makes a joke of this whole "TTC should serve Toronto first!" argument. York Region riders pay the exact same fare as Torontonians, making up 75-80% of the cost of their ride. "Humble taxpayers" foot the pathetically small leftover share.

Every major TTC capital project is funded through upper levels of government, so that's a joke too. Why am I paying - twice - for your stupid Crosstown, eh? Don't get me wrong - I think it's a shame TTC lost the pre-Harris operating subsidy. But let's not get on our high horse about Toronto's amazing investment in transit.

As for Montreal, all you really prove is what's been said here 50 times before: the primary issue is governance/funding. if the Toronto border happened to be at Highway 7 instead of Steeles - with everything else existing as it does today - your argument would be non-existent. Similarly, if we had proper regional revenue tools. But the entirety of your argument essentially boils down to "The reason it doesn't make sense to build transit outside of Toronto is because I'm in Toronto and I don't want to pay for that stuff." Which isn't non-sensical at all. But it's a very limited view of the reality of the commutershed and economic reality circa 2017.

I don't think you're being selfish; I just think it's proof that we've outgrown the system we have in place. Because that's what happens when you draw lines in the sand and people keep moving beyond them and you stop investing in extending and buttressing your network.

be directed at York Region who's desperate to become a major city by creating a new downtown out of thin air and density on the back of Toronto and its citizens

knowing full well that the current network can't handle it.

This is just absurd. Firstly, because York Region isn't a city and secondly because Markham alone is already one of the biggest and fastest-growing cities in the country and the notion that they are "desperate" is both laughable and insulting.

Provincial policy REQUIRES them to build that downtown.
It was the PROVINCE who promised them the subway.
We WANT suburbs to stop building crappy sprawl and intensify along transit corridors. Stop talking about them being selfish and desperate for doing the right thing. It's beyond hypocritical. Perhaps you'd prefer Markham's 1980s government to the current one? They were far less desperate for transit, that's for sure.

That growth is happening and the question is how we accommodate and serve it.

So you're misunderstanding cause and effect. if people buy homes on the edge of Vaughan and Markham instead of near a subway at Yonge/7, they will drive. And they will clog up the roads. You want to talk about a network that "can't handle it"? Roads and transit don't exist in vacuums. You're just playing a shell game and more than tacitly encouraging sprawl. Absurd indeed.

It's about recognizing that if Toronto doesn't fix its public transit infrastructure with mass expansion, the city will choke under its own congestion.

Yeah, how are they doing with that? Have we reversed plans for LRTs and subways again this week or was that last month? hard to keep it straight.

But, sure, fix the TRANSIT congestion and we'll deal with the roads clogged by people in the 905 to whom you denied transit later.

All this time and productivity loss costs Toronto billions and makes it less attractive for all kind of investment that will go elsewhere. Sorry to break it to you, but they'll go to Montreal, Vancouver or major US cities, not Richmond Hill or Markham.

As I said, no understanding of regional economics. Toronto and Markham are the same economy. Breaking news.

Toronto suffers...guess what, so will the whole 905 and the rest of Ontario. So it's in the 905 interest that Toronto stays as attractive, more attractive as ever so more investments comes which beneficiates the 905 cities as well.

And vice versa. Shocking, I know. But by all means, keep treating the 905 (with Peel + Durham + York housing more people than all of Toronto) like pathetic, lucky satellites circling the wonder that is Toronto, with its perfectly managed transit and lack of congestion.

So unless those York Region politicians "grows the F up", I applaud the City of Toronto on their stance on the York Region subway.

Well, we agree on the need for someone to grow up, anyway.

Thank you

Sincerely,

an humble Toronto Taxpayer

You're welcome,
A lifelong GTA citizen.

 

[Leo_Chan]

All of these arguments (some have good points) would probably be solved if Metrolinx actually had power to make and veto transit decisions in the GTHA. The same way Wynne veto'd Toronto's decision for toll (however controversial that is). Having a larger body that can look at all of the GTHA and determine how the province and each city to spend money on transit would in theory be more efficient. However this is not likely to happen anytime soon as money and decisions aren't things that exist at the moment. And of course Metrolinx has to be restructured with elected representatives.

IMO, transit should be a overbuilt in the same way the Viva Rapidways are overbuilt in present day. We should be building for the future and not be playing catch up. I make the relationship of the Rapidways as a "standard of overbuilding" because development WILL increase due to it, but not be so overbuilt that it costs significantly more to operate than it makes, like the Sheppard Stubway. The GTHA has to work together in order to solve it's transit problems, and the first step is the amalgamation of the transit agencies into Metrolinx.

Please no flame

 

[amnesiajune]

And of course Metrolinx has to be restructured with elected representatives.

Metrolinx is already structured by our elected representatives at Queen's Park. I think it would be better left alone. Like the comment before yours pointed out, the provincial government already makes most of the transit planning decisions through its power to fund projects. The TTC would've never agreed to build the subway north of Steeles, for example, if it wasn't dependent on the province's money for their portion of the subway. Moving operations under Metrolinx would be great but it isn't going to happen until there's a provincial government willing to piss off cities and fund transit properly.

 

[Cobra]

Your passion is admirable. it's too bad it's at the expense of logic.

You just said yourself that serving people outside Toronto, that's what GO is for, right? So, if I live just north of Steeles (which I do) and wanted to take transit to visit you at Yonge/Sheppard for a coffee, how pray tell would I do that using GO? I mean, here we are in TOTALLY different cities, and all.

I guess you think I should drive north to Langstaff, take the train down to Union and then the subway back up? Or YRT to Finch and then a GO bus?

Your blanket statement about "most people" you know doesn't tell us much about actual travel patterns and what's an efficient way to move people. Nor does the blanket statement that people who live at Bathurst/Steeles (for example)- but on the south side, can be moved efficiently by TTC but the people who live just on the north side are better served by GO.

Really, it's mostly funny how this thread spirals and repeats itself every 50 pages or so.

Cmon, you know exactly what I meant and that's a very poor way to twist my message. I no mean I'm saying someone living a block from Steeles is better served by GO Transit. TTC routes already enter York Region on some branch and that's ok. But I really don't see why you taking a YRT bus or a TTC route entering York to go to Sheppard-Yonge is such a big deal.

Hell, I'm even saying the subway should go to Steeles making it easier for everyone. By people being better served by GO (which includes the bus by the way) we're obviously talking about 905 centers or farther away from the city.

Pffft. TTC is barely subsidized by Toronto taxpayers which makes a joke of this whole "TTC should serve Toronto first!" argument. York Region riders pay the exact same fare as Torontonians, making up 75-80% of the cost of their ride. "Humble taxpayers" foot the pathetically small leftover share.

Yeah, almost half a billions subsidy from the city is nothing...ok...I guess those "Humble taxpayers" footing the pathetically small leftover share have nothing to do with that half a billion.
Yes fares makes most of the TTC revenues but do we know the % of those fares being Toronto/905? Haven't seen those numbers.

Every major TTC capital project is funded through upper levels of government, so that's a joke too. Why am I paying - twice - for your stupid Crosstown, eh? Don't get me wrong - I think it's a shame TTC lost the pre-Harris operating subsidy. But let's not get on our high horse about Toronto's amazing investment in transit.

That's poor logic as Torontonians taxes pays for the LRT projects in the province and GO RER but you don't see me say "Why am I paying twice for GO or VIVA" Really?

As for Montreal, all you really prove is what's been said here 50 times before: the primary issue is governance/funding. if the Toronto border happened to be at Highway 7 instead of Steeles - with everything else existing as it does today - your argument would be non-existent. Similarly, if we had proper regional revenue tools. But the entirety of your argument essentially boils down to "The reason it doesn't make sense to build transit outside of Toronto is because I'm in Toronto and I don't want to pay for that stuff." Which isn't non-sensical at all. But it's a very limited view of the reality of the commutershed and economic reality circa 2017.

I don't think you're being selfish; I just think it's proof that we've outgrown the system we have in place. Because that's what happens when you draw lines in the sand and people keep moving beyond them and you stop investing in extending and buttressing your network.

But you conveniently avoid the points I raised above. Did I not say if the funding formula was improved, subways beyond the 416 borders would get more support? Not once have you said that it's reasonable to say that

• York Region should help pay for the O&M (Because it's not right that the TTC cuts service on routes while money that could maintain the current level of service is being spent to make Vaughan Subway working)
• That Yonge subway can't take an extension until proper relief to the line is in place
• I even said the Relief Line made more sense than Yonge if GO RER is impossible to implement, but that remains to be seen how impossible it is to implement for Richmond Hill

Yet it's still the "Give me the subway now, don't want to talk O&M funding, who the hell cares about service in the 416 as long as I get my comfy seat on the train". Forget about me and my opinion, most Toronto medias, Council and citizens are against it. All I'm saying, there are ways to change that but the current "entitled" attitude by York Region is a major reason why the support is so low here.

Firstly, because York Region isn't a city and secondly because Markham alone is already one of the biggest and fastest-growing cities in the country and the notion that they are "desperate" is both laughable and insulting.

Provincial policy REQUIRES them to build that downtown.
It was the PROVINCE who promised them the subway.
We WANT suburbs to stop building crappy sprawl and intensify along transit corridors. Stop talking about them being selfish and desperate for doing the right thing. It's beyond hypocritical. Perhaps you'd prefer Markham's 1980s government to the current one? They were far less desperate for transit, that's for sure.

That growth is happening and the question is how we accommodate and serve it.

So you're misunderstanding cause and effect. if people buy homes on the edge of Vaughan and Markham instead of near a subway at Yonge/7, they will drive. And they will clog up the roads. You want to talk about a network that "can't handle it"? Roads and transit don't exist in vacuums. You're just playing a shell game and more than tacitly encouraging sprawl. Absurd indeed.

All that text just shows how much the core of my message gets lost. See my previous point. The point I was making with Montreal was pointing out how drastically different suburbs in the 450 were from those York Region councillors idiots from the 905 crying in the Toronto Star and dismissing reports on Yonge subway ridership just because they want the subway now. Don't you see how Montreal is way more open now than Toronto?

Yeah, how are they doing with that? Have we reversed plans for LRTs and subways again this week or was that last month? hard to keep it straight.

But, sure, fix the TRANSIT congestion and we'll deal with the roads clogged by people in the 905 to whom you denied transit later.

Nice way to dismiss a regional problem that is very real

As I said, no understanding of regional economics. Toronto and Markham are the same economy. Breaking news.

I beg to differ. The point I'm making is that if Toronto can't be competitive to other world Centre (Richmond Hill and Markham aren't), those businesses and investments providing jobs to the whole region will just go elsewhere, and no it won't be Richmond Hill or Markham, elsewhere.

And vice versa. Shocking, I know. But by all means, keep treating the 905 (with Peel + Durham + York housing more people than all of Toronto) like pathetic, lucky satellites circling the wonder that is Toronto, with its perfectly managed transit and lack of congestion

You're missing the point. It's not about snubbing the 905, it's about recognizing that if Toronto hurting, the whole region gets hurts. It's in everyone's best interest that Toronto's congestion problem gets fix for the benefits of us all. Right now, our transit system is decade behind and needs to be address. And don't get me that piss poor argument about the 905 being only satellites, because A LOT is being done for the 905 (LRT and a modern Paris like RER). Yet, how dare Toronto says that the inner city subway network needs to enter the 21st Century and reach underserved areas BEFORE going out again??? Are you forgetting that we already built a subway to York?

That's what's the problem here. You say that Toronto's acting only for their own selfish interest in regards to transit but my god is the 905 (politicians of course) are doing the same, if not more. My main point is a "Montreal Metro area" approach would help everyone. Suburbs recognizing the difficult core city challenges and the same in reverse.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

Cmon, you know exactly what I meant and that's a very poor way to twist my message. I no mean I'm saying someone living a block from Steeles is better served by GO Transit. TTC routes already enter York Region on some branch and that's ok. But I really don't see why you taking a YRT bus or a TTC route entering York to go to Sheppard-Yonge is such a big deal.
Hell, I'm even saying the subway should go to Steeles making it easier for everyone. By people being better served by GO (which includes the bus by the way) we're obviously talking about 905 centers or farther away from the city.

But this thread is about a subway that BARELY goes into the 905. No one is talking about subways to King City or Milton, which are obviously served better by GO. The question is why it would make sense to stop at Steeles, despite contiguous urban development and sustained intensification that continues along the corridor a mere 4km or so to a designated growth centre where multiple modes of transit already converge. Because of taxes?

Yeah, almost half a billions subsidy from the city is nothing...ok...I guess those "Humble taxpayers" footing the pathetically small leftover share have nothing to do with that half a billion.
Yes fares makes most of the TTC revenues but do we know the % of those fares being Toronto/905? Haven't seen those numbers.

I don't know those numbers either (I would assume TTC has a guess, at least). But the fact remains TTC is as poorly subsidized as any transit system anywhere and given that the user fee (ie fare) accounts for the vast majority of the actual cost, YR riders who board TTC are paying a pretty fair share. (By contrast, a Torontonian who boards YRT is being far more heavily subsidized by 905 taxpayers). None of that is to say the current system of fares and funding is fair or desirable.

That's poor logic as Torontonians taxes pays for the LRT projects in the province and GO RER but you don't see me say "Why am I paying twice for GO or VIVA" Really?

I was just making a rhetorical point. Obviously I understand the value of the Crosstown and have no problem with provincial and federal funding going to it, even though I'll probably hardly ever ride it. The fact that it's not where I pay taxes is besides the point. There are already thousands of people from just north of Steeles commuting down on the Yonge subway, they're just doing so inefficiently, paying a double bus fare or driving. If we have to fix funding, let's fix it - but it's the only thing resembling a logical reason for spending billions to take the subway to Steeles, leaving the fundamental inefficiency in place.

• York Region should help pay for the O&M (Because it's not right that the TTC cuts service on routes while money that could maintain the current level of service is being spent to make Vaughan Subway working)
• That Yonge subway can't take an extension until proper relief to the line is in place
• I even said the Relief Line made more sense than Yonge if GO RER is impossible to implement, but that remains to be seen how impossible it is to implement for Richmond Hill

This is a long thread at this point. I've said before that in my opinion:
-YR should chip in for O&M (and I have no reason to believe they wouldn't agree to a fair deal if that was the dealbreaker)
-RER and "SmartTrack" should provide adequate relief, at least in the short term. My argument has been the YNSE can go first and the system would not be overwhelmed so long as the DRL (if it's still needed) proceeds immediately after. But given how advanced the planning is for the former, it's counterproductive to keep waiting on the latter.
-Some seem to think the deprioritization of RH RER is part of a pro-subway conspiracy but there are all sorts of obvious reasons it makes less sense than other reasons. That said, both RER and subway are critical to the long-term development of the UGC.

So, I don't entirely disagree with your points.
But in the meantime, I'm driving or biking or busing to Finch and already getting my comfy seat on the train. You're just making it a hassle, putting more GHGs in the air etc.

I vote for YR politicians to fight for YR, same way you vote for TO pols to do the same for your city. I damn straight expect them to fight for the subway after the province legally required them to intensify and then failed to give them the crucial piece of infrastructure they were promised that's needed to make it happens. The fundamental problem is how the funding and politics pit everyone against each other, not YR politicians trying to do the right thing with too much enthusiasm.

I beg to differ. The point I'm making is that if Toronto can't be competitive to other world Centre (Richmond Hill and Markham aren't), those businesses and investments providing jobs to the whole region will just go elsewhere, and no it won't be Richmond Hill or Markham, elsewhere.

Tell that to Teva, BMW, AMD, Honda, Hyundai and all the other companies with national HQs in Markham and RH. Jobs are going there before they go to London or Calgary or whatever. But it's still one commutershed and one shared economy. Toronto and its suburbs will live or die together.

You're missing the point. It's not about snubbing the 905, it's about recognizing that if Toronto hurting, the whole region gets hurts. It's in everyone's best interest that Toronto's congestion problem gets fix for the benefits of us all.

But you're missing the point - the inverse is equally true.

. Yet, how dare Toronto says that the inner city subway network needs to enter the 21st Century and reach underserved areas BEFORE going out again??? Are you forgetting that we already built a subway to York?

I don't think I forgot that, did I? No, I remember that. We agree Toronto's network is way behind; that's largely (but not entirely) Toronto's fault. But the region has kept growing and now their negligence is having ripple effects. It's not a zero sum game - all these things need to be done.

At the end of the day we agree the entire structure needs to change but seeing we're all in it together is a big part of that. Toronto is selfish - every city has a right to be selfish. The current structure gives them no reason to care if someone is driving to Finch when a subway north of Steeles would make their commute easier. Toronto definitely has real problems to fix, but we're not going to move very far forward if they keep "fixing" transit the way they've been doing while the population keeps growing and the economic and other interests become more intertwined.

 

[amnesiajune]

It's not about snubbing the 905, it's about recognizing that if Toronto hurting, the whole region gets hurts. It's in everyone's best interest that Toronto's congestion problem gets fix for the benefits of us all.

The best way to fix Toronto's congestion problems is to organize public transit in a way that makes sense for the entire region. A huge part of Toronto's congestion problem is that transit has historically been built and operated based on municipal boundaries that date back to the 18th century. I'd gladly take public transit to work, but I'm forced to drive from my Toronto home to my office in the 905 and contribute to the city's congestion problem because I cross a line that was drawn in 1792, and as a result it's more expensive to take transit than it is to drive. If a 6 km northbound trip didn't cost twice as much as a 12 km southbound trip, tens of thousands of cars like mine would be pulled off of Toronto's streets, and that benefits the city.

Look at the suburbs - they all accept transfers from connecting systems. You can transfer between MiWay, Brampton Transit and YRT buses without paying any extra fare. MiWay, Oakville, Burlington and HSR have the same arrangement, as do YRT and DRT. They've come to the extremely obvious conclusion that it's worth giving up a few thousand fares per day (only a tiny percentage of their passengers cross a municipal boundary) to encourage transit use, and that's in cities that have more than enough road space for cars. Why hasn't Toronto figured this out yet?

 

[Leo_Chan]

The best way to fix Toronto's congestion problems is to organize public transit in a way that makes sense for the entire region. A huge part of Toronto's congestion problem is that transit has historically been built and operated based on municipal boundaries that date back to the 18th century. I'd gladly take public transit to work, but I'm forced to drive from my Toronto home to my office in the 905 and contribute to the city's congestion problem because I cross a line that was drawn in 1792, and as a result it's more expensive to take transit than it is to drive. If a 6 km northbound trip didn't cost twice as much as a 12 km southbound trip, tens of thousands of cars like mine would be pulled off of Toronto's streets, and that benefits the city.

Look at the suburbs - they all accept transfers from connecting systems. You can transfer between MiWay, Brampton Transit and YRT buses without paying any extra fare. MiWay, Oakville, Burlington and HSR have the same arrangement, as do YRT and DRT. They've come to the extremely obvious conclusion that it's worth giving up a few thousand fares per day (only a tiny percentage of their passengers cross a municipal boundary) to encourage transit use, and that's in cities that have more than enough road space for cars. Why hasn't Toronto figured this out yet?

Toronto knows about this (I hope) and is not doing it because giving up money for a chance to earn back the money is a gamble. Even though people on these forums may switch from driving to fare integrated transit, we are not the general population, not even close. The "average" person just sees transit is not an option and just takes be the alternative, they won't switch unless they are forced (or at least pushed) to switch. $$$ > $$$ - $ + $$ for some reason.

 

[amnesiajune]

Toronto knows about this (I hope) and is not doing it because giving up money for a chance to earn back the money is a gamble.

Toronto shouldn't do it because they'll earn back the money. They should do it because many people like me will pay $3.00 for two TTC trips and $3.40 for two YRT trips and take our cars off the city's streets.

The "average" person just sees transit is not an option and just takes be the alternative, they won't switch unless they are forced (or at least pushed) to switch.

That's not true in my experience. The average person has a price limit and a time limit. If public transit can deliver on both, they'll gladly take transit and relax on their way to work rather than dealing with traffic. With the status quo, for people who don't work downtown or work and live within the city proper, the existing options can often provide service within the time limit, but it never delivers service anywhere near their price limit - you always end up spending more on transit than you would on your driving commute. For me, I'd save about $200/month in gas and extra insurance (the extra amount that I get charged if I drive to work), but I'd spend $250/month on transit.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

The best way to fix Toronto's congestion problems is to organize public transit in a way that makes sense for the entire region. A huge part of Toronto's congestion problem is that transit has historically been built and operated based on municipal boundaries that date back to the 18th century. I'd gladly take public transit to work, but I'm forced to drive from my Toronto home to my office in the 905 and contribute to the city's congestion problem because I cross a line that was drawn in 1792, and as a result it's more expensive to take transit than it is to drive. If a 6 km northbound trip didn't cost twice as much as a 12 km southbound trip, tens of thousands of cars like mine would be pulled off of Toronto's streets, and that benefits the city.

Look at the suburbs - they all accept transfers from connecting systems. You can transfer between MiWay, Brampton Transit and YRT buses without paying any extra fare. MiWay, Oakville, Burlington and HSR have the same arrangement, as do YRT and DRT. They've come to the extremely obvious conclusion that it's worth giving up a few thousand fares per day (only a tiny percentage of their passengers cross a municipal boundary) to encourage transit use, and that's in cities that have more than enough road space for cars. Why hasn't Toronto figured this out yet?

Sorry, that congestion problem stands on it's own - none of the 905 municipalities are free from it. The number of trips going from auto to transit because of the lack of an extra fare is so minuscule relative to driving, it's almost a non-issue.

Why would I know? Because I use the system- the impact is a drop in the bucket.

AoD

 

[amnesiajune]

The number of trips going from auto to transit because of the lack of an extra fare is so minuscule relative to driving, it's almost a non-issue.

That's because there aren't many people who work in one suburb and live in another. There are a lot of people who live in Toronto and work in the suburbs, or who work in the suburbs and live in the outer areas of Toronto - a lot of them would move to public transit if it only cost $150/month, especially couples who could own one car rather than two.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Not really - Mississauga-Brampton Misssissauga-Oakville would be two examples. And Scarborough is also a defacto suburb.

AoD

 

[Cobra]

But this thread is about a subway that BARELY goes into the 905. No one is talking about subways to King City or Milton, which are obviously served better by GO. The question is why it would make sense to stop at Steeles, despite contiguous urban development and sustained intensification that continues along the corridor a mere 4km or so to a designated growth centre where multiple modes of transit already converge. Because of taxes?

That "barely" cost BILLIONS.

But that continuous development beyond Steeles isn't Toronto's nor the TTC's mandate to take under consideration. Their mandate is to solve the downtown problems in places like Liberty Village, Parkdale, Waterfront Communities, inner urban centres and business cores...all of Toronto, not York Region. As long as they haven't solve these issues first, they are right not to want to accommodate development in York Region while people that are already there in those areas and have no rapid transit are severely underserved.

All I'm saying, there's something called priorities and Yonge North isn't one of them. Down the road? Sure, now? no

Have you ever been trapped in a Yonge subway shutdown? How does a RH subway extension helps the region as a whole? However a Relief Line gives people alternatives if Yonge fails, and that line could "potentially" reach RH (above ground/cut and cover as much as possible). I don't get this Yonge "obsession" when all the reports states it can't handle an extension without Relief

I don't know those numbers either (I would assume TTC has a guess, at least). But the fact remains TTC is as poorly subsidized as any transit system anywhere and given that the user fee (ie fare) accounts for the vast majority of the actual cost, YR riders who board TTC are paying a pretty fair share. (By contrast, a Torontonian who boards YRT is being far more heavily subsidized by 905 taxpayers). None of that is to say the current system of fares and funding is fair or desirable.

TTC is by far one of the transit system at the most disadvantage in the western world in term of public subsidies. That's a fact. Hence the coast of a Metropass here being insanely high here compare to major US and Canadian cities.

There are already thousands of people from just north of Steeles commuting down on the Yonge subway, they're just doing so inefficiently, paying a double bus fare or driving. If we have to fix funding, let's fix it - but it's the only thing resembling a logical reason for spending billions to take the subway to Steeles, leaving the fundamental inefficiency in place.

Those riders would likely pay a higher fare on a Richmond Hill subway, you do know that right? Again, the city already acknowledged that Yonge Street between Finch and Steeles had too many vehicles and signalled their interest in extending the line to Steeles to reduce congestion on that stretch.

Again, why are you surprise that Toronto's mandate isn't to manage the traffic beyond Steeles? Isn't that YRT and York Region mandate to solve that? BRT? LRT? Toronto saying no is a logical response.

By the way, the old EA saying that only subway made sense for the Richmond Hill Corridor conveniently left out the LRT option completely. Why not use the money it would cost to build that subway beyond Steeles on an LRT network that would connect all the major dots in York Region? I don't get that logic at all. With that money on LRT, Yonge Street would be covered and could go farther north and you could connect RHC to Vaughan subway on Highway 7. None of that was studied, proposed and taken under consideration. If I came across a study saying subway is the only way, it would get more support. I'm not resisting this just to be a jerk, but there are valid reasons to why people oppose it and that needs to be sorted out first.

-YR should chip in for O&M (and I have no reason to believe they wouldn't agree to a fair deal if that was the dealbreaker).

Yeah, they should, that's a given

-RER and "SmartTrack" should provide adequate relief, at least in the short term. My argument has been the YNSE can go first and the system would not be overwhelmed so long as the DRL (if it's still needed) proceeds immediately after. But given how advanced the planning is for the former, it's counterproductive to keep waiting on the latter..

That right there is the attitude that the 416 can't stand. "Zero F given" for those south of Finch who already have a horrible service on Yonge. Let me tell you how screwed the Orange line in Montreal is during rush hour after the Laval Extention... They now joke the only way to use it is to live in Laval. The Line is full by Jarry so why would you think Toronto would want that for the current users of the Yonge line. Studies don't lie, Can't happen without the Relief Line.

-Some seem to think the deprioritization of RH RER is part of a pro-subway conspiracy but there are all sorts of obvious reasons it makes less sense than other reasons. That said, both RER and subway are critical to the long-term development of the UGC..

GO RER and Subway is overkill until a study states otherwise

But in the meantime, I'm driving or biking or busing to Finch and already getting my comfy seat on the train. You're just making it a hassle, putting more GHGs in the air etc.

And you want to transfer that hassle to thousands of people living south of you...how considerate instead of "waiting" for a way to remove hassle for EVERYONE...then you wonder why the low support from Toronto

Tell that to Teva, BMW, AMD, Honda, Hyundai and all the other companies with national HQs in Markham and RH. Jobs are going there before they go to London or Calgary or whatever. But it's still one commutershed and one shared economy. Toronto and its suburbs will live or die together. But you're missing the point - the inverse is equally true.

Let's just drop this subject. We'll go in circle on this if you keep putting Toronto and it's suburbs on equal ground.

I don't think I forgot that, did I? No, I remember that. We agree Toronto's network is way behind; that's largely (but not entirely) Toronto's fault. But the region has kept growing and now their negligence is having ripple effects. It's not a zero sum game - all these things need to be done.

Most of this is political. Toronto has been planning for decades but contrarily to other Metro cities in the western world, the Feds and province have been MIA. As for the region, GO RER will be online way before the Relief Line, so I would de-dramatize your read of the situation. Politics had a heavy hand in this where elsewhere the politics is out of it.

At the end of the day we agree the entire structure needs to change but seeing we're all in it together is a big part of that. Toronto is selfish - every city has a right to be selfish. The current structure gives them no reason to care if someone is driving to Finch when a subway north of Steeles would make their commute easier. Toronto definitely has real problems to fix, but we're not going to move very far forward if they keep "fixing" transit the way they've been doing while the population keeps growing and the economic and other interests become more intertwined.

It's not about being selfish, its about sticking to the mandate you were given. You cannot fault Toronto and the TTC to think about Toronto only. That's their mandate. Regional planning is Metrolinx mandate. If they are adamant that subway is the way to go for RHC, I expect them to take the current situation of the subway under consideration as well and not sabotage the TTC in the process because of potential votes. That means a fair cost sharing formula that doesn't force the TTC to cut service level and neglect the network just to provide service to York Region. The Montreal scenario I believe will be coming and Toronto will do the same thing when they are face with having to choose to increase fares or cut service while servicing a subway in Vaughan in the middle of nowhere.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

All I'm saying, there's something called priorities and Yonge North isn't one of them. Down the road? Sure, now? no

I get that it's not TTC's mandate; that's the problem. Because what's in the interests of commuters, workers, taxpayers and citizens is not necessarily in the interests of the councils of the various municipalities in which they work and/or live and/or traverse on their way in between. It's ultimately an academic argument but "priorities" are not objective. If funding and governance were different, the priorities would be. Just because this particular project is not Toronto's priority doesn't mean it's not a priority in some bigger sense.

Have you ever been trapped in a Yonge subway shutdown?

Yah. It sucks. and so what?

How does a RH subway extension helps the region as a whole?

I think that's been answered by me and others many times. to sum up:
-fosters suburban intensification rather than sprawl
-improves non-auto modal split in north end of TO and south end of YR
-reduces GHGs by taking hundreds of buses an HOUR + cars off the road on the region's main street
-facilitates development of transit-oriented growth centres, as dictated by the PPS and Places to Grow and the Official Plans of every GTA municipality
-promotes development of mixed- and employment uses in traditionally residential suburbs which in turn promotes reverse commuting, a more sustainable economic base for 905 municipalities, a more diverse housing stock, greater housing choice and affordability blah blah blah

Need I go on?

However a Relief Line gives people alternatives if Yonge fails,

Please. It gives people an alternative only south of Bloor, which is walkable anyway. Maybe it helps people in Scarborough too? If I park at Finch and then hear on the radio that Line 1 is down, the DRL is no more useful to me than a bobsled. Period. RER would provide an alternative, yes. Then I could drive over to the RH or Barrie line and pick it up.

You're misconstruing the function the DRL serves. Network redundance is not part of it except indirectly for a small segment.

And I totally support the DRL - it's not my fault Toronto has spent 15 years finding way to build other things first. Or at least to debate building them. But council's position is now that SmartTrack will serve that function (ie not of providing a Yonge alternate but of diverting people away from Yonge/Bloor). Planning (correctly, I think) is still pushing the DRL. We'll see what happens when push comes to shove with it.

As to the idea that it COULD reach RH, that's rather fantastic at this point. Even Sheppard is down the road and that idea came from Metrolinx, not Toronto. The same report says that a series of moves would open adequate capacity on Yonge to allow the extension, but I know those desperate YR politicians get in trouble for saying so. Best to cherry pick the parts we like.

Those riders would likely pay a higher fare on a Richmond Hill subway, you do know that right? Again, the city already acknowledged that Yonge Street between Finch and Steeles had too many vehicles and signalled their interest in extending the line to Steeles to reduce congestion on that stretch.

You're talking about too many different things. So what, about fares? An extension just to Steeles will never happen. Politics.

Again, why are you surprise that Toronto's mandate isn't to manage the traffic beyond Steeles? Isn't that YRT and York Region mandate to solve that? BRT? LRT? Toronto saying no is a logical response.

BECAUSE IT'S THE SAME TRAFFIC!
If I leave my house near Highway 7 and drive to Finch Station, whose traffic is that? Markham? Vaughan? RH? not Toronto, apparently. Traffic does not respect municipal borders. Approach it piecemeal at your peril. All those agencies you list should be coordinating. Saying, "not my problem until they cross Steeles," is not a sane approach.

By the way, the old EA saying that only subway made sense for the Richmond Hill Corridor conveniently left out the LRT option completely. Why not use the money it would cost to build that subway beyond Steeles on an LRT network that would connect all the major dots in York Region? I don't get that logic at all.

Sigh. You're talking in circles and this has all been covered many times. The EA was not comparing modes. It wasn't a conspiracy. It was pre-determined - fair or not - that it would be a subway. All the planning was (and IS) done accordingly. The ship has sailed on the LRT thing, even if it would have made sense. But I can see, notwithstanding the lack of a thorough EA or any other analysis, that the LRT would be more "logical."

There's no need for an LRT to connect Yonge/7 to Jane/7 because - and you must know this - there's already a BRT there, which is LRT upgradable. So you're upgrading the BRT to LRT and downgrading the subway to LRT ,all of it based on what?

GO RER and Subway is overkill until a study states otherwise

In terms of what? where's 44North when you need him?
The UGC is reverse engineered from the capacities of both systems, they serve different markets - it's all been said 50 times.

Let's just drop this subject. We'll go in circle on this if you keep putting Toronto and it's suburbs on equal ground.

I've got some damned nerve, eh?
That's pretty much my raison d'etre. Sorry!

 

[Cobra]

I get that it's not TTC's mandate; that's the problem. Because what's in the interests of commuters, workers, taxpayers and citizens is not necessarily in the interests of the councils of the various municipalities in which they work and/or live and/or traverse on their way in between. It's ultimately an academic argument but "priorities" are not objective. If funding and governance were different, the priorities would be. Just because this particular project is not Toronto's priority doesn't mean it's not a priority in some bigger sense.



Yah. It sucks. and so what?



I think that's been answered by me and others many times. to sum up:
-fosters suburban intensification rather than sprawl
-improves non-auto modal split in north end of TO and south end of YR
-reduces GHGs by taking hundreds of buses an HOUR + cars off the road on the region's main street
-facilitates development of transit-oriented growth centres, as dictated by the PPS and Places to Grow and the Official Plans of every GTA municipality
-promotes development of mixed- and employment uses in traditionally residential suburbs which in turn promotes reverse commuting, a more sustainable economic base for 905 municipalities, a more diverse housing stock, greater housing choice and affordability blah blah blah

Need I go on?




Please. It gives people an alternative only south of Bloor, which is walkable anyway. Maybe it helps people in Scarborough too? If I park at Finch and then hear on the radio that Line 1 is down, the DRL is no more useful to me than a bobsled. Period. RER would provide an alternative, yes. Then I could drive over to the RH or Barrie line and pick it up.

You're misconstruing the function the DRL serves. Network redundance is not part of it except indirectly for a small segment.

And I totally support the DRL - it's not my fault Toronto has spent 15 years finding way to build other things first. Or at least to debate building them. But council's position is now that SmartTrack will serve that function (ie not of providing a Yonge alternate but of diverting people away from Yonge/Bloor). Planning (correctly, I think) is still pushing the DRL. We'll see what happens when push comes to shove with it.

As to the idea that it COULD reach RH, that's rather fantastic at this point. Even Sheppard is down the road and that idea came from Metrolinx, not Toronto. The same report says that a series of moves would open adequate capacity on Yonge to allow the extension, but I know those desperate YR politicians get in trouble for saying so. Best to cherry pick the parts we like.



You're talking about too many different things. So what, about fares? An extension just to Steeles will never happen. Politics.



BECAUSE IT'S THE SAME TRAFFIC!
If I leave my house near Highway 7 and drive to Finch Station, whose traffic is that? Markham? Vaughan? RH? not Toronto, apparently. Traffic does not respect municipal borders. Approach it piecemeal at your peril. All those agencies you list should be coordinating. Saying, "not my problem until they cross Steeles," is not a sane approach.



Sigh. You're talking in circles and this has all been covered many times. The EA was not comparing modes. It wasn't a conspiracy. It was pre-determined - fair or not - that it would be a subway. All the planning was (and IS) done accordingly. The ship has sailed on the LRT thing, even if it would have made sense. But I can see, notwithstanding the lack of a thorough EA or any other analysis, that the LRT would be more "logical."

There's no need for an LRT to connect Yonge/7 to Jane/7 because - and you must know this - there's already a BRT there, which is LRT upgradable. So you're upgrading the BRT to LRT and downgrading the subway to LRT ,all of it based on what?



In terms of what? where's 44North when you need him?
The UGC is reverse engineered from the capacities of both systems, they serve different markets - it's all been said 50 times.




I've got some damned nerve, eh?
That's pretty much my raison d'etre. Sorry!

Oh well, Metrolinx already agrees with Toronto's rational that the Relief Line is needed for a RH extension, hence the York Region Councillors losing their minds in the media. Hell, I think we'll demonstrate (if it hasn't been done yet) that Relief Short is not enough and it will take Relief Long to allow Yonge to accommodate the extra ridership from York... So, yeah...don't know what to tell you. You're stuck waiting.